Legal Opinion

City of St. Louis v. Roe

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 29, 1991No. 58414PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REINHARD, Presiding Judge.

Defendant was found guilty by the trial court of creating a nuisance in violation of City Ordinance Numbers 11.58.240 and 11.-58.050 and was fined one hundred dollars. We reverse.

The information alleged that defendant on the 24th of May 1989, at 4301 Connecticut, in the City of St. Louis, “did then and there unlawfully fail to abate violation of Health Ordinance as follows: 11.58.240 Waste water or f ref use [sic] discharging in street, alley, etc. In violation of Section 11.58.240 and 11.58.050; Revised Code, City of St. Louis, 1980.”

City Ordinance 11.58.240 reads:

Wh…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. City of Webster Groves v. EricksonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mediq PRN Life Support Services, Inc. v. AbramsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. City of Boonville v. RowlesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API